OK, that was clearly a good prediction, and congratulations are in order. Consistent, however, with the high probability of occurrence as calculated by Roger. But the (presumed?) aftershocks don't improve it, do they? And, if not, then all we have is one data point, which has little statistical significance by itself. (Yes, I know there are additional data points, hopefully a complete list of ALL predictions along with hits and misses. Somewhere. Or is this the only one so far using this methodology?)

Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande, CA